Congrats @toka, it looks promising. Better than the google thing. Was wondering about the choice of columns. I haven’t started to make an entry, because I didn’t want to ‘pollute’ the table, but, how many fields/columns are then proposed?

Specific feedback

For me it would be good to have the column ‘mapping tool’ (OSM/Google maps)

I don’t understand why we have two columns out of one in the google spreadsheet… Well I guess I understand why but it ends up with many entries having empty cells…

I find not easy to find the table on the page (“least entries” “last edited”… what about “see all”). Is that on purpose for the moment?

almereyda:

If the discussion is about managing many maps, the ideal interface should be a map itself. This is then another question to answer.

I disagree: I find displaying maps through a map is not handy cause there are plenty of maps that are not location specific but global for example. Something like an atlas seems more in question for me, but then it’s just a question of visualization (@toka: is the content of the wiki machine readable - please excuse my ignorance…)

there are plenty of maps that are not location specific but global for example

This is not what we typically understand as a geographic map.
If we’re also extending our research scope to non-geographic maps, then we have a totally new problem here. But of course, this question integrates already.

@alabaeye please notice, that there is a new thread linked in the first message of this thread

Lets call the new approach the “swiki”-approacht for brevity.
You have to get rid of the idea of table.
The two tables which I created are just arbitrarily selected.
The data is in more ore less “free form” on wiki pages, one page per entry.
What you see as a table is in fact a query. You can choose whatever fields you like.
Create a own “table”, better “view” on your page.
Look for the source of the pages to have an idea, how it works.

And: be bold. It’s a wiki, everything is versionized, you cant break it …